tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18801419393807673012018-11-05T20:43:03.971+13:00TheDUDE UK & New ZealandIrreverent blog on local and international issues that matter (at least to TheDUDE).The Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.comBlogger107125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-5867456395417450982013-01-11T23:22:00.003+13:002013-01-11T23:37:37.715+13:00Where is the stimulus New Zealand?Economic and labour market commentators, including government departments and the Reserve Bank, have been forecasting for at least the last year and a half that employment would 'continue' to recover gradually. This hasn't happened. Employment is flatlining, and government efforts to stimulate a recovery are indiscernable. <br/><br/>The Canterbury rebuild will happen. Eventually that will increase employment in construction, at least in this region, with flow-on effects to employment in other industries, but again, mainly in Canterbury. <br/><br/>Agriculture produce will likely continue to enjoy historically high prices, providing Chinese growth continues, but much of the employment growth in this increasingly productive industry has been had. It should be possible to get greater leverage off of the premium that should be had from agriculture products 'made in New Zealand' - given China's unquenchable desire for these. But so far there's little evidence of this or of it contributing to greater employment. <br/><br/>So where is employment growth going to come from? The public sector isn't growing anymore - the government's seen to that (except for health, which always grows, but steady health growth doesn't result in the expansionary growth needed in other sectors). <br/><br/>That leaves us with the government's passive strategy of 'providing the conditions for business growth'. Unfortunately, this may not be enough. <br/><br/>TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-40923957188857983422012-12-22T16:33:00.001+13:002013-01-11T23:23:36.487+13:00UK Immigration ExplosionEven an astounded Daily Express can't get the increase in Polish immigrants to the UK right. It wasn't an 89% increase from 2001 to 2011, it was a truly astounding 890% increase, to well over half-a-million. That is an almost nine-fold increase in just ten years, in fact, more like six years, as Poland was only admitted to the EU in 2004. <br/><br/>Overall, 7.5 million migrants live in the UK, up from 4.6 million ten years ago - a 63% increase. And in 2014, the EU will open up the UK's borders to twenty million more people, as Bulgaria and Romania fully enter the union.<br/><br/> <a href="http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/364176/7-5-million-migrants-live-in-Britain">http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/364176/7-5-million-migrants-live-in-Britain</a><br/><a href="http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/census/2011-census/key-statistics-for-local-authorities-in-england-and-wales/rpt-international-migrants.html">http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/census/2011-census/key-statistics-for-local-authorities-in-england-and-wales/rpt-international-migrants.html</a> <br/><br/><br/>TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-51602554418628508622012-12-20T22:15:00.001+13:002013-01-11T23:24:13.869+13:00Unemployment Rate vs Unemployment Benefit RateNew Zealand Government performs miracles, raising the unemployment rate while lowering the benefit rate. Is that why we have more beggars on the streets?<br/><br/><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cJwBK9wFm8c/UNLW5VIxlPI/AAAAAAAAB6g/I3cAaIW3uF4/s1600/Unemployment%2BRate%2Band%2BUnemployment%2BBenefit%2BRate.png" imageanchor="1" style=""><img border="0" height="256" width="400" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cJwBK9wFm8c/UNLW5VIxlPI/AAAAAAAAB6g/I3cAaIW3uF4/s400/Unemployment%2BRate%2Band%2BUnemployment%2BBenefit%2BRate.png" /></a><br/><br/>TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-49650796848738323712012-12-15T14:55:00.000+13:002012-12-15T14:55:01.383+13:00MANDATORY WORK ACTIVITYNice title eh?<br/><br/> This is the lovely language used under the UK's new Universal Credit scheme: <br/><br/> "<b>Mandatory Work Activity</b><br/><br/> "17. Mandatory Work Activity will be part of the toolkit that Jobcentre Plus advisers will have available to them. Where advisers believe a jobseeker will benefit from experiencing the habits and routines of working life, they will have the power to refer the recipient to Mandatory Work Activity. The placement will be for up to four weeks and aimed at helping the recipient develop the labour-market discipline associated with full-time employment such as attending on time and regularly, carrying out specific tasks and working under supervision.<br/><br/> "18. Requiring a small group of recipients to engage in full-time activity will give them the opportunity to demonstrate their compliance with the Jobseeker’s regime. If a recipient fails without good cause to attend or complete the placement, then we will impose a significant financial sanction. This could be, for example, withholding Jobseeker’s Allowance for at least three months."<br/><br/> <a href="http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/universal-credit-chapter3.pdf">Universal Credit - Welfare That Works, Chapter 3 - Conditions and Sanctions, p29</a><br/><br/> And you thought it was too late for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four">Nineteen Eighty-Four</a>.<br/><br/><br/> TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-86844059332981233812012-12-15T14:33:00.001+13:002012-12-15T14:55:43.271+13:00Be Very Afraid: UK's 'Universal Credit' Scheme This is quoted directly from the Department of Work and Pensions' paper on <a href="http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/universal-credit-chapter3.pdf">Universal Credit - Welfare That Works, Chapter 3 - Conditionality and Sanctions</a>:</br></br> "Our current proposals for financial sanctions are:</br></br> "a. Failure to meet a requirement to prepare for work will lead to 100 percent of payments ceasing until the recipient re-complies with requirements and for a fixed period after re-compliance.</br></br> "b. Failure to actively seek employment or be available for work will lead to payment ceasing for four weeks for a first failure and up to three months for a second.</br></br> "c. The most serious failures that apply only to jobseekers will lead to Jobseeker’s Allowance payment ceasing for a fixed period of at least three months (longer for repeat offences). Actions that could trigger this level of penalty include failure to accept a reasonable job offer, failure to apply for a job or failure to attend Mandatory Work Activity."</br></br> Be very afraid. And expect a good deal less young or not so young entrepreneurs, authors, actors, musicians, thinkers and artists having the time to do anything creative any more. </br></br> TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-77361036482949914582012-12-04T11:50:00.000+13:002012-12-05T16:33:48.355+13:00NZIER - Lifting Export PerformanceApparently, "in New Zealand, the quality of the business environment has deteriorated through some big steps on the part of government to increase its activity in the business sector through, for example, buying assets and engaging in businesses in sectors such as rail or banking." p16</br></br>Or so say the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research (NZIER), our largest and most influential economic think tank, in their report on <a href="http://nzier.org.nz/publications/lifting-export-performance-actions-to-drive-growth-in-exports">Lifting Export Performance </a>published last month. </br></br>And apparently, "Growth in social spending also has the unintended consequence of biasing production in favour of domestic-focussed industries. An additional dollar of social welfare spending typically ends up in increased consumption of locally-based non-tradable products and services. This is precisely what social welfare programmes are designed to do - to support costs of living which are mostly local in nature. Nonetheless, it means that an additional dollar of spending goes to consumption, rather than investment, and then to industries which do not export." p18</br></br>Hmm, a fair bit of social spending assists families to buy forms of agricultural produce (that is food), and that's New Zealand's number one export, so the argument is at least partially, if not substantially, flawed. </br></br>Problem is, NZIER then go on to to make further claims based upon it, including the following:</br></br>"These biases in favour of consumption (rather than saving) and domestically focussed enterprise go on to put upward pressure on the exchange rate, downward pressure on the prices that exporters receive on international markets and thus there is less incentive to export. This is essentially a tax on exports." p18</br></br>Wow, so social spending is a "tax on exports". </br></br>I always knew NZIER focussed only on economics rather than on a more holistic view of life and living standards, but I also thought it was somewhat objective. Now I realise it's become a campaigning arm for the right wing economic viewpoint that spouts ever lower taxes on corporates, less regulation and less income sharing. </br></br>These NZIER methods aren't going to grow anything other than harm and inequality. If we want growth, we should encourage sharing, because if everyone benefits from growth, then everyone will contribute to it. And what the Hell is wrong with Government investment in "rail or banking"? If the government hadn't invested we wouldn't have a rail network, airline or highly successful New Zealand bank.</br></br>TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-30616717061421425722012-11-17T13:34:00.000+13:002012-11-17T14:46:13.119+13:00Silly MBIEWhat’s the point of the new Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment? What sense is there in squeezing together the disparate organisations of Building & Housing, Science and Innovation, Health & Safety, Employment Relations, Immigration, and Economic Development into one ‘super’ ministry?</br> </br>Joyce says that, “the new Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment will help the Government’s business growth agenda by implementing integrated policies to build a more competitive and internationally-focused economy”, but if we want joined up policy across government and industry sectors, let’s create a central policy think tank that can operate across government and sectors, like the private think tanks do; let’s not unify the operational arms of disparate organisations to make a super organisation – that’s just plain dumb.</br> </br>Joyce says that, “at present when businesses engage with government they work with multiple government agencies, which takes away valuable time, as well as incurring unnecessary duplication of effort.” But this is rubbish. New Zealand has the greatest ease of doing business of anywhere in the world. The idea that we don’t, and that this needs to be corrected, is a myth, a straw man that Joyce has erected as another excuse to proceed with his damaging pet project. </br></br>We all know that big, diverse organisations don’t work well; while small, lean organisations do. The private sector does poorly when it lumps together diverse corporations, and so does the public sector. MBIE isn’t a giant oil company, multi-national food product producer or media conglomerate, it doesn’t have the commonality of business that these large organisations need to succeed. MBIE should not be; the diverse organisations that comprise it should stay separate, and in fact should separate further to be leaner, more efficient organisations highly specialised in their fields of operation. </br></br>Joyce’s idea that MBIE will be, “a single focused business-facing government ministry,” is ludicrous - it’s not desirable to have such a single focus even for economic development, let alone science, innovation, health, safety, immigration and employment relations. The point of government is to enable the fulfilment of every member of society, and that isn’t achieved through focussing only on business. </br></br>And even if every organisation had a single, common, over-arching focus of fulfilment without harm for everyone, that still wouldn’t require merging these organisations physically into a giant one. No, specialised, separate organisations work better, even, in fact especially, when they share a common purpose. In short, the MBIE merger is unnecessary, and what's worse, a lot of people are going to be hurt because of it – just what government shouldn’t be doing.</br></br>Quotes from: <a href="http://www.national.org.nz/Article.aspx?articleId=38115">http://www.national.org.nz/Article.aspx?articleId=38115</a> </br></br>TheDUDE The Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-83464837949782162912012-11-17T12:12:00.000+13:002012-11-17T14:46:49.678+13:00Why Is Key Right & Wrong? He’s right because he believes everyone wants to be completely individual and independent from the state, but he’s wrong, because he believes this can happen naturally within capitalism. It can’t. Capitalism doesn’t distribute incomes equitably. It requires a shared base income so that everyone has the opportunity to make their best contribution at every stage of their lives. This doesn’t require greater government, it requires greater income sharing. There's a difference. <br /><br />TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-60662166535573182542012-03-29T20:05:00.002+13:002012-11-17T13:57:55.413+13:00Doing More Than What Needs To Be Done, Before It Needs To Be DoneIf government organisations only did what needs to be done, a lot less effort would be wasted, they would be far more efficient, and very many less hours would be required to get necessary and timely work done.<br /> <br />Instead most public sector managers focus on trying to do as much as possible to ‘prove themselves relevant’ to ministers. Most of this work never reaches the minister. Most of the work is done before it needs to be done, and when it comes time for some work to be done, it is found that the work done before it was known what was needed, is irrelevant. That is the danger of second guessing what needs to be done before it is needed and doing it immediately – this work is almost always wasted effort, but most public sector managers can’t resist doing ‘anticipatory’ work.<br /><br />It’s also why most of the public sector doesn’t become more efficient on its own, because most public sector management keeps on making more and more work for itself in anticipating work, that in the end, actually never needed to be done. <br /><br />TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-2706982375559616912011-11-13T22:17:00.001+13:002012-11-17T14:07:54.620+13:00Response To A Guaranteed Minimum IncomeTheDUDE likes this - a response to Treasury's analysis of Guaranteed Minimum Income (<a href="http://www.oursystem.info/2011/11/gmi-response-to-treasurys-economic.html">http://www.oursystem.info/2011/11/gmi-response-to-treasurys-economic.html</a>)<br /><br />TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-10650658295726564222011-08-03T07:22:00.000+12:002012-11-17T14:09:27.843+13:00Economic Thinking'If you are highly educated and older you likely get paid more, and if pay is a proxy for productivity, then you are by definition more productive.' Economic thinking. Of course by that thinking, finance is also the most productive industry sector, because they pay themselves the most (and volunteers are entirely unproductive).<br /><br />TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-41162564908668383652011-07-24T14:05:00.002+12:002011-07-24T14:05:40.804+12:00Employee Compensation Share of GDP<p>This chart indicates what could well be something of a concern for those in New Zealand. Click on the chart to see it larger. <br /></p><p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SElyabp5obc/Tit5EmdTpYI/AAAAAAAABxw/x-1UCWECDSo/s1600/Employee%2BCompensation%2BShare%2Bof%2BGDP.jpg" imageanchor="1" style=""><img border="0" height="197" width="400" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SElyabp5obc/Tit5EmdTpYI/AAAAAAAABxw/x-1UCWECDSo/s400/Employee%2BCompensation%2BShare%2Bof%2BGDP.jpg" /></a></div></p><p>Clearly employee compensation is much less in New Zealand than in the US and UK, and has been that way since the sharp decline of the 80's. Couple that with much smaller GDP per capita and we get a rather poor situation for little old New Zealand. <br /></p><br />TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-77684742040230673402011-05-09T13:01:00.000+12:002012-11-17T14:10:56.475+13:00Drop Tax On Alcohol To Boost NZ TourismReckon it would work? <br /><br />TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-58350925022030802082011-03-18T12:45:00.001+13:002011-03-18T12:45:49.656+13:00Don't Cycle Fast In The CityDon't cycle so fast a car door opening would cause you serious injury, especially wherever there is only a narrow gap between parked cars and moving traffic, which is pretty much anywhere in the central city and surrounding suburbs. It just isn't worth it. <br /><br />In fact, wherever possible, keep away from roads where there's little space for cyclists, and avoid times where there's a great deal of traffic. <br /><br />If isn't safe, and you can't do it safely, don't do it. <br /><br />TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-5906092133390155812011-02-15T12:30:00.000+13:002011-02-15T12:30:14.255+13:00Plugging The Gap (NZ Institute) || Food & Tourism...?"The difficulty for firms trying to build successful international businesses is that the domestic market here is very small so that businesses are small when they begin to export and the markets they serve are distant. That means their capability and resource base is relatively low when they internationalise and the cost to establish in offshore markets is relatively high. Those difficulties often cause delays that consume capital and erode competitive position."<br /><br />"The business must have a product or service that is appealing enough to win customers and those customers must be willing to buy from an emerging business that is headquartered a long way away. It must be able to deliver the product or service at a competitive price and have costs that are low enough to provide an attractive margin."<br /><br />"The current ecosystem is not delivering sufficient talent and capital to the internationalising businesses so the businesses are not as successful as they could be. Some are being sold overseas when the value created could otherwise be held in New Zealand."<br /><br />Rick Boven (2010), <a href="http://www.nzinstitute.org/index.php/commercialisingscience/paper/plugging_the_gap_an_internationalisation_strategy/">Plugging The Gap – An Internationalisation Strategy</a>, New Zealand Institute. <br /> <br />There has to be a reason why a product is produced in New Zealand, with agriculture it's obvious: the conditions are just right and arable land is relatively plentiful. Produce a product that can be produced more easily elsewhere, and the market is elsewhere, then production will move. In short, unless production in New Zealand delivers some form of advantage, production will move. <br /><br />'Clean & Green' ('Pure') are probably our greatest brand assets. These gel well with food production and sustainable tourism. There is no particular limit to the diversity of food product or variety of tourist experience that we can produce. We would do well to play on this. If we work to New Zealand's strengths we will most likely succeed in overseas markets and still produce here. <br /><br />TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-65146021776083880512011-02-01T15:26:00.001+13:002011-02-01T15:27:04.390+13:00Dollars Are Only One Measure Of Productivity (NZ)It's not gross domestic product per worker, it's the monetary value of product per worker, which is quite a different thing from product per worker. On product per worker I have no doubt New Zealand would be very much the same as Australia. <br /><br />By measuring everything in dollars we fall down on the things that are actually important to us, like making a meaningful contribution and finding fulfilment in what we do. <br /><br />New Zealand's natural products have not done well (in dollars) because other countries have subsidised a glut on the market. Now the market has grown (in world population and affluence) and even those extensive subsidies are not enough to encourage supply great enough to keep prices down. <br /><br />TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-64853688720140351652011-01-22T18:43:00.007+13:002011-01-22T18:58:46.396+13:00The Authoritarian Attitude Is Dying, And Good Riddance"Key [New Zealand Prime Minister] would improve the odds if he were to add authority to likeability, put his stamp on the government as well as be its face. Authority would require that when he says something it is the government speaking, not John Key musing. It would require that when a minister does something, it is the action of an unmistakably John Key minister, not of someone who happens to be in the ministry."<br /><a href="http://www.synapsis.co.nz/Dominion/Dominion_2011/Dominion_11Jan17.htm">An Investment Opportunity For Trader Key</a>, Colin James, Dominion Post, 17 Jan 2011 <br /><br />This is rubbish. It is his qualities of approachability and good nature that contribute the greatest part to his likeability and his popularity (along with his clear capability). His authority is without question - he is the Prime Minister. <br /><br />The idea that a position of authority must entail an authoritarian attitude is a nonsense. In the sense that he is collaborative, constructive and willing-to-talk he embodies the qualities that are vital to anyone being popular in the new politics. The old authoritarian 'strong leader' is largely dead in modern Western politics (or so most of us hope), just as it is dying in modern Western corporations (though not as quickly as many of us would wish). <br /><br />TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-91198744156565946342011-01-19T16:20:00.001+13:002011-01-19T16:21:05.069+13:00Israel/US Use Virus To Sabotage Iranian Nuclear FacilitiesRelevant Article: <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/world/middleeast/16stuxnet.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all">Israeli Test on Worm Called Crucial in Iran Nuclear Delay, NY Times</a><br /><br />Right or wrong, corporate multinationals actively kowtow to the interests of America. It must be pretty hard for Siemens to be trusted again as a software provider.<br /><br />Where's the legality of this? It isn't debated. Because of cause the actions are never admitted. It's obviously illegal, domestically. But internationally, the laws are weak, and what's been ruled right, has often been might.<br /><br />Sometimes some harm has to be done to prevent a greater harm. I guess this is the essense of the best argument used. But is this the case here? Is American-Israeli sabotage of Iranian nuclear facilities the lesser harm against Iran's rhetoric about Israel? Is murder of scientists?<br /><br />TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-75806364038294851002010-12-17T12:29:00.002+13:002010-12-17T12:29:19.226+13:00Adversarial Politics & Phil Goff (NZ)Adversarial politics seems to be the only politics Phil Goff knows. <br /><br />Whatever National does, count on Phil Goff to criticise it and find fault. <br /><br />Phil appears to have only one style, and that's the old politics of win or lose. <br /><br />But a good leader demonstrates constructive, collaborative behaviour. That's the way we want to be led and the way we want to be treated. <br /><br />The continuous sniping is the old politics, the tired politics, the foolish and stupid politics of no good purpose, played as a game for winners and losers. <br /><br />We're past that now, why isn't Goff? <br /><br />I've been a Labour supporter, but Key, and many of his cabinet (not all), are the better leaders now. <br /><br />I only post this because I want Labour to do something constructive. <br /><br />TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-50917196692164213232010-11-30T17:56:00.002+13:002010-11-30T17:56:11.914+13:00Wikileaks Diplomatic Cables LeakWikileak's cables leak puts the state of affairs in a better light than the media does. Perhaps the establishment shouldn't find releasing the truth so scary. <br /><br />But then again, we can probably always rely on the media to distort whatever they say (jazz it up, sensationalise it, speculate on it, etc). <br /><br />TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-21196217106095831152010-11-27T22:25:00.005+13:002010-11-27T22:27:18.966+13:00You've Got To be Kidding!Australia's Kevin Rudd was at least partly kicked out of government because of Australia's slavish kowtowing to the United States, so why an Earth is this still going on? <br /><br />Not to mention Obama, who was most definitely voted in by a vast margin because of Bush's total delinquency on foreign policy. And yet the US Pentagon is still acting like it should be protecting that legacy rather than reneging it: we all know Bush was a prick, and that Obama is meant to be genuine, upfront and supporting the truth. So why the hell is he (via the Pentagon) protecting Bush? <br /><br />That the US and Bush were backstabbing its allies… What a surprise!!! The neo-conservatives were only about America. No-one should be surprised that the documents prove that. There were plenty of public documents at the time that ascribed Cheney and other Bush cronies to exactly these policies. <br /><br />The awful shock, if any, is that the Pentagon under Obama is just as secretive and just as defensive as it was under Bush. Either Obama hasn't got a grip on changing the culture of the departments of Homeland Security, et cetera, et cetera (and it has only been a short time) or he's just a sap. <br /><br />And the same can be said of Australia's 'new' government. What's changed? <br /><br />Power corrupts – that rule never seems to change. God damn it. <br /><br /><b>Australia slams 'reckless' WikiLeaks over US cables</b> <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iOEg5Znwgpu57lX9sx19wNY_mNJg?docId=CNG.5b3b763ba2738bcc238cf218258f7f67.421">http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iOEg5Znwgpu57lX9sx19wNY_mNJg?docId=CNG.5b3b763ba2738bcc238cf218258f7f67.421</a> <br /><br /><b>US warns of likely harm from WikiLeaks release</b> <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jUZomhwHKrBR-R3tw_E-cFunmZgQ?docId=e36bae4685ba416e80c2fde3e9ec78ff">http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jUZomhwHKrBR-R3tw_E-cFunmZgQ?docId=e36bae4685ba416e80c2fde3e9ec78ff</a><br /><br />TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-18735493372612205052010-11-26T22:46:00.009+13:002011-01-06T23:26:27.799+13:00David Miliband Makes A Blunder On Leadership"So you're saying to the country, 'show me where to lead and I'll follow'; you're not saying, 'I'm going to be your next Prime Minister and I will lead you'; you're saying, 'tell me where to go...'?" <br /><br />Such an invitation to get it right. But he doesn't. So close. But he fails. Like every leader (virtually). He fails. The interviewer is right. Ask the people. Listen to the people on the topics they are interested in – they will show you the direction: the data, the information and the knowledge, will show you the answer. <br /><br />C'mon Miliband, you can do better than this. It's by listening to the people, by studying the problems, by getting feedback on the solutions from those whom the issues affect that you will find the answers. There is no other way to a correct solution. Don't take the 'strong-man' road of being the 'strong leader' and not admitting that you have to ask people what they want – that's just stupid. <br /><br />I think you've just made mistake in hearing what was being asked. I think you know better. Tell us you do. <br /><br />[BBC Radio 4 Interview with David Miliband – 'Who are Miliband's 'squeezed middle'?' - <a href=""So your saying to the country, 'show me where to lead and I'll follow', you're not saying, 'I'm going to be your next Prime Minister and I will lead you', you're saying, 'tell me where to go.'." Such an invitation to get it right. But he doesn't. So close. But he fails. Like every leader (virtually). He fails. The interviewer is right. Ask the people. Listen to the people on the topics they are interested in – they will show you the direction; the data, the information and the knowledge, will show you the answer. C'mon Miliband, you can do better than this. It's by listening to the people, by studying the problems, by getting feedback on the solutions from those whom the issues affect that you will find the answers. There is no other way to a correct solution. Don't take the 'strong-man' road of being the 'strong leader' and not admitting that you have to ask people what they want – that's just stupid. I think you've just made mistake in hearing what was being asked. I think you know better. Tell us you do. [BBC Radio 4 Interview with David Miliband – 'Who are Miliband's 'squeezed middle'?' - http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9231000/9231239.stm]">http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9231000/9231239.stm</a>]<br /><br />TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-30792553302000272742010-11-25T14:56:00.002+13:002011-01-24T13:16:11.110+13:00Joint Drug-Taking & Social BondingJoint drug-taking is a form of social bonding, but can quickly become a requirement of social bonding. <br /><br />If we are to remove the requirement of drug-taking in social bonding, whether it be alcohol in pubs, parties, ad infinitum, or other forms of drugs, then we need to show that these social occasions can occur as well as they should without the drug. This can be fostered with the knowledge that all of our social bonding before the age of eleven was without drugs.<br /><br />But can we really do that? Can we, any more, socialise without alcohol? <br /><br />TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-28021483238741010342010-11-24T14:41:00.001+13:002010-11-24T14:42:09.198+13:00Alcohol RecruitmentAlcohol companies deliberately recruit young people into drinking their product – that's what they do, as Bacardi CEO Seamus McBride specifically attests to on BBC's The Bottom Line (02 Nov 2010): <br /><br />"My first thought is, 'who are going to be the target group to recruit the new generation of drinkers for our global brands?' We generally focus on legal drinking ages (because that changes by country), and then, 'how are we going to introduce 23, 24, 25, 30-year olds to our spirit brands?' Now they consume media, communication very differently to when we were younger…, so we need people who are open to, expert at, both inside and outside the company, on digital work, social networks, on events, on sponsorship, on celebrity, and that kind of thing." <br /><br />"We focus on, let's say, 25 to 30 year olds because that's the age when boys become men, girls become women, and they develop their preferences." <br /><br />"One of the things we want to do is revitalise the rum market. So we try to attract 25 to 30 year olds into the rum market through the brand Bacardi. So we will portray people in our advertising people who are 25 to 30 because they will recognise themselves in that."<br /><br />"We have 25 year olds, we have 30 year olds in our businesses around the world because those people understand the trend, they understand what 25 year olds think."<br /><br />What chance do youth have against this? <br /><br />Liquor companies will never voluntarily inform on the harm their product does. <br /><br />But the information provided on what a product does needs to reflect the whole balance of what that product does, not just the fun part. Alcohol companies in the current capitalist ethos will not work to provide this. We need a system that's ethos isn't just the pursuit of money regardless of harm, but the pursuit of fulfilment (for all) without harm (to any). <br /><br />(The Bottom Line, 02 Nov 2010 - <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00bqscp#synopsis">http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00bqscp#synopsis</a>)<br />(OUR SYSTEM - <a href="http://www.oursystem.info/">http://www.oursystem.info/</a>) <br /><br />TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1880141939380767301.post-55461490361716036172010-11-17T18:47:00.002+13:002010-11-17T18:47:58.965+13:00WINZ Doesn't Provide Support, It Provides CoercionThat's why people try to get on the sickness benefit, to get some protection from WINZ. <br /><br />I doubt there is a single person who has ever been forced to apply for a benefit that has ever had any trust in WINZ. <br /><br />If WINZ really provided support they wouldn't confine themselves to the strict mantra of availability for only full-time work, and they would consider work outside of the confines of just employee jobs. They would tailor their assistance to people, not force people into their policy peg holes which don't fit anyone. <br /><br />TheDUDEThe Authorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10114070975577494530noreply@blogger.com0